Furious Seasons

September 25, 2007

Seattle Suicide Bridge May Get Barrier, Adobe Execs Could Care Less

I noted last week that the Seattle Times had written about the Aurora Bridge, Seattle's version on the Golden Gate Bridge. My article on the Aurora Bridge problem came out in Seattle magazine this week. Here's a link to the online version. Not sure if my piece is better than the Times', but it's got some fabulous pictures taken by Brian Smale. You'll have to buy the print version if you want the pics.

My very real hope is that the Washington State Legislature will cough up the $5 million needed to put a barrier on the bridge to prevent people from hurtling to the ground below (instead of a narrow slip of water) where they've rattled the local neighborhood for years. Now, with new businesses in the area, they are traumatizing high tech workers at Adobe and Impinj, offices for which are next to the bridge.

Once, in Portland, I happened upon a jumper soon after he'd hit the pavement. It was not a pretty sight, and has stayed with me ever since. I can understand why the neighbors and workers end up being rattled by what they see.

When I reported the article, officials at both Adobe and Impinj did not return requests for comment. In Adobe's case, someone connected with the company told me they considered it too controversial to comment upon. What a bunch of fools--irresponsible ones at that who apparently could care less about the welfare of their employees. If i could exist without using Adobe's pdf and Flash, then I would show them how I feel about their silence.

By comparison, Seattle police and union officials had no problem going on the record asking that something be done because cops are basically sick of putting themselves at risk of being pulled off the bridge while trying to talk down would-be jumpers. I guess we know who the adults are in this situation.

In addition, I have to compliment a small group of local citizens going by the handle of Seattle FRIENDS, who've done much to press local officials to do something about this situation. Here's the group's website. It's one of those rare moments when you see a bunch of citizens get together and force change without the stench of politics in the air.

From last week's posting on this, I know some will criticize the barrier as little more than an attempt to assuage the feelings of glossy high tech workers when the problem has been going on for 76 years and the money can be used for other purposes. Let me put it like this: let's say there's a highway with a corner where four or five people die in car crashes each year and have for years. One day, a developer builds a new tract of homes in the area and builds a park where children play near the corner. After a few more crashes and deaths and children shaken by seeing headless torsos and such, the parents press the local government to put up a stop sign at the corner. The crashes stop, the deaths stop, the kids continue to play in the park. This is kind of like that.

And if you cannot understand that, then I cannot help you.

Posted by Philip Dawdy at September 25, 2007 12:03 AM

del.icio.us Digg it reddit

Comments

This is a good article. The Space Needle alone should be proof enough that simple barriers save lives. Standing over 500 feet above pavement, I think that speaks for itself, along with the iconic suicide ideal. The barrier took away, in my opinion a right to fame no one wants anyone to own.

I have a personal story, that belongs on my blog, but needs to be here. I saw the horrified look on a construction worker's face when my daughter aimed the car toward him in an attempt to "do self harm". I know what I felt without question; I knew 3 people were going to die.

Because of the simple orange cones [barriers] on the roadside, no one did.

Posted by: Stephany at September 25, 2007 05:02 PM

Stephany, thanks. I was wondering about the Space Needle.

As for Adobe, I am going to find a software alternative and wipe them off my computer.

That's the only way to talk to these corporations. Hit em where it counts. Breaking news about GM striking, who knows,maybe a Reader boycott? Make a website without Flash?

Or maybe some poor person has to land on on an Adobe exec or his/her spouse or child for the appropriate measures to be taken.

Posted by: susan at September 25, 2007 11:34 PM

"And if you cannot understand that, then I cannot help you."

Philip, I don't understand and I'm asking for your help.

My concern is that such measures do not prevent suicide. They merely prevent bridge jumping wherever there's a net.

I doubt very much anyone ever went down to the bridge, peered over the side, saw the net, and went home and watched television instead.

I agree that suicide isn't painless. But I also believe that when you compare the pain of someone ready to jump, relative to the pain of a witness, our sympathy (and policy!) belong with the suicide.

Philip, you're a very bright guy and I respect your opinion greatly. But I'm at a loss to understand why you're okay with carrying a gun yet so adamant about bridge nets.

What are the stats on successful suicide methods, anyway? I live close to Vancouver Island. We've got overpasses, buildings, bridges and cliffs and I'm not tempted. But I know, for sure, that had I been allowed to carry a gun that I wouldn't be here today.

Jumpers mean business. If there's a net on one bridge, they'll find another. Your analogy (stop sign next to the new development) is right on. The only thing a net will do is improve surrounding property values.

Posted by: Francesca Allan at September 29, 2007 08:14 AM

Francesca, I appreciate your comments. Very close to my own thoughts. If they want a net, fine. but folks who have decided they are done here are done, and they'll figure out how to make it done, far as i can tell.

I've lost more people to suicide than most, so that may slant my world view a bit, but the way i see it, we are born into this world with only one thing, and leave it with only one thing, and that thing is our life. I dont support the decision, but I certainly respect the choice. I struggle with the idea that its illegal to take your own life. that seems a crazy law to me. yes, crazy. it makes no sense. your life is your own. you give me free speech, you tell me i can live my life how i please, but i cant end it how i please? very strange cultural taboo.

my father jumped off that bridge. would a net have changed his decision, so that he would stay around to slowly die of the brain damage brought on by poor choices in his youth? no. he would have found a different route. his note said it was about dignity, he wanted to die while he still had the mind and the self that he knew himself as. its aweful, but there can be dignity in it.

i dont know. its a hard issue. and it does seem clear: the one thing a net will change is property values. everything else remains the same open but taboo question... and those who choose the option will be pushed to some other margin.

Posted by: little goat at October 2, 2007 09:59 PM